Hi all, I have added a correction to my latest bubble fusion article today:
The article says that time correlation of light flashes and neutron measurements was only shown by Taleyarkhan et al. to be within a 2 millisecond time window. This refers to the overall time span in which correlations occurred (Phys. Rev. E., 2004, fig.7). Earlier Taleyarkhan et al. had already shown coincidences to be within a time window of roughly 10 nanoseconds (Science, 2002, fig.5a). http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/20/20542/1.html - Haiko > Apart from any theoretical consideration, Putterman's demand is nutty. A > correlation is a correlation. If the timing does not fit Putterman's > expectation, that means the phonomenon does not work the way Putterman > thinks it does; it does not mean there there is no correlation. > > Roger Stringham and Russ George think that Putterman is being deliberately > obtuse about this timing issue. He is setting a goal he knows the > experiment will not meet, in order to denigrate the results. People have > told me that Putterman is a political academic infighter. > > - Jed
